• Acamon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    The irony is the “one of these people is wrong, somebody painted a six or a nine” is overtly false in this situation. Given the message of the original image, the artist spefically draw a symbol that could be interpreted two ways, and therefore (by design) both figures are equally and partially correct.

    I don’t believe we should abandon all pursuit of truth or objectivity, but the commentor is really making the artists case for them.

    • Akagigahara@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Artist’s intent/message is based on a symbol that can be interpreted two ways, yes. But it is a massive oversimplification for the sake of validating opinions that are plainly wrong.

      The Artist’s point can only be conveyed by creating a situation where there is no context, so neither opinion can be validated. This is inapplicable in any way IRL because there is always context that will validate a specific opinion with facts. The comment just highlights that this situation is contrived and couldn’t, or shouldn’t, happen in such a way.

      It warns of taking Data out of context to suit a specific narrative.